Who is at the forefront of the development of AI? Soon finished my master's degree, and so I want to dedicate my whole life to science, I would like to get the PhD where I will work or nearby. I am now considering the option of German, TUM, but it is worth to have a fallback.
Then this thread has no point. There's no university that has the people and the resources to be at the forefront of AI research, and so will be for the forseeable future.
IBM could be a decent second choice, as this anon >>7646153 pointed out. Another one is Baidu. But still, I don't see them being the best.
Recent report stated that were true ai achieved 65% of the world population would be unemployed. 34% employed in ai related services and 1% would be as gods.
And you want to further this nightmare scenario?
In general terms, definitely Google. But there are lots of niches where others lead the way. There are weather prediction AIs, and control systems for aircraft, and more frivolous things like chess engines. There's greenhouse/agricultural automation. Predictive/adaptive supply chain management. Intelligent traffic control is coming soon.
Nightmare? Sounds to me like we're getting pretty close to heaven. By that prediction, we'll have an economy that's sufficiently automated to the point that people will only work if they want to, for extra luxuries. Either that, or they'll only work 4 months of the year, or for 10 years full time before retirement.
I've been working for over 10 years, and let me tell you, retirement would be pretty sweet right now. Godspeed, OP, godspeed.
You think the super-rich will allow 'their' money to be drained on a welfare system? Dream on. Slowly common mass production will cease, an artisan class will supply everything bespoke to their gods, this is already in process
>IBM or Google
this would be my first guess as well for general AI forefront but there might be entities we aren't aware of or don't expect that are forefront, especially in niches
I highly doubt that Stanford and MIT are on the same level as Google and IBM. number of papers is not the same as niveau of research
good universities are often at the forefront in certain research areas. I know this well from my own university which is filled with state of the art research and engineering. but with AI I am sceptical. not that universities aren't at the state of the art in this sector but rather in which way. I've never heard of any Stanford or MIT AI that has accomplished nearly as much as IBM or Google AIs.
I'm going to make a maybe controversial claim and say that modern AI is mostly driven by private industries. It also has little resemblance to the AI dreams of the 50s-60s. I think a better name for the sort of modern AI research going on would be: "algorithms for hard/uncomputable problems" or "applied statistics and modelling".
>all these idiots buying into the Google hype machine
IBM is and always will be evil, but at least Watson demonstrated tangible results. Google is such a one-hit wonder, even the technofetishists on /g/ consider their shitty phones beneath consideration and head straight for Apple every time.
Pretty much this. It really depends on what OP means by AI. Do you want to be on the cutting edge of machine learning techniques — search engines, self-driving vehicles, etc? What everyone else said.
Do you want to chase strong AI? Double major in neuroscience and go study under Robert Granger at Dartmouth, I'm serious. His people are doing more with comp. neuro. right now than anyone else I've found.
The beauty of democracy is that should the people will it, we can tax the rich however we like. We can nationalize any production or technology that we feel is important to us, and no one can really say dick about it.
And even in non-democratic places, the fact is that corporations are mostly run by just a small number of people, and the wealthy remain so by our sufferance. If the rest of us ever decided that they were truly a threat to our well-being and really got determined to destroy them, it would be a simple matter. It's happened before, and it will happen again. The rich aren't as powerful as most people tend to think; it's an illusion that they cultivate.
You have no idea what Google does, do you? They are a massive company with an R&D budget that outclasses the entire GDP of a lot of independent nations, with their fingers in so many pies that it boggles the mind.
If I were rich I would not like to live equally with everyone. You have worked much harder for your money given you are a trust fund baby. It feels like you are being cheated by having to live equally with the "normies". No way things are gonna be equal in the near future without lots of conflict. The rich have so much power.
300 billion is a lot, but the reason they are important is that they are spending their money in the right things. Countries however waste lots of money for useless things. Plus funding AI isn't something that's a priority.
watch them terminate people like you before they reach 10yrs old based on a metal evaluation.
>jimmy doesn't like rich people
>jimmy has been terminated
>bob likes rich people
>bob gets to live
I am so sorry, I dont mean to patronise, but I had such a laugh. You are here, on 4chan, and you still believe this is a democracy where YOU can change anything? In the UK, the establishment controls everything, in the US the corporate elite control everything, I cant speak for Aus, NZ, Canada, France, Germany, Holland but....
>I highly doubt that Stanford and MIT are on the same level as Google and IBM.
You wot? MIT is leagues ahead of Google and IBM. MIT has researchers google and IBM cannot obtain for their research staff. Stanford is where Google goes and recruit their Machine learning staff.